Started By
Message
re: ESPN: Alabama might be nearing the end of its dynasty
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:49 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:49 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
So you can become a dynasty in just a 5 year span in your opinion? What happens if in 20 years from now, some team sets the standard by winning 6 in 10 years?
We still look back and think 3 of 5 is dynasty worthy?
We still look back and think 3 of 5 is dynasty worthy?
2
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:55 pm to cas4t
It's all relative man. In CFB it seems winning a NC as often as not qualifies, and it seems 3 is the magic number (which is why 3 out of 6 years qualifies). It's just a judgment call.
Then there will be a higher standard. Just like Wilkonson's 47 (?) game win streak, Bowden's 15 year run of top 5 or better, etc. Those things set/exceed a standard.
Just an opinion, of what is commonly held, that's all.
quote:
some team sets the standard by winning 6 in 10 years?
Then there will be a higher standard. Just like Wilkonson's 47 (?) game win streak, Bowden's 15 year run of top 5 or better, etc. Those things set/exceed a standard.
Just an opinion, of what is commonly held, that's all.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:55 pm to Bench McElroy
The falloff after Saban leaves will be one of the worst in histories.
Saban is arguably not only the G.O.A.T at bama, but even in all CFB history.
Saban is arguably not only the G.O.A.T at bama, but even in all CFB history.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:57 pm to Indfanfromcol
quote:
The falloff after Saban leaves
Over/under on when UA's slow dance with NCAA starts again? 3 years?
J/K...kinda.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:58 pm to Indfanfromcol
LSU has done fine without him
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:58 pm to cas4t
quote:
I'm not "heated". I could just see the butthurt in your post and called you out. And to call your team a dynasty after just 5 years is pretty ignorant.
What in the hell is wrong with you?
3 in 5 is a dynasty..
Posted on 12/28/12 at 12:59 pm to cas4t
Do you know how hard it is to be dominant in football these days? Don't think you do.
This post was edited on 12/28/12 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:00 pm to CrimsonFanSince94
I would think you'd have to win your own conference in those years to be considered a dynasty
or hell, even division
or hell, even division
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:00 pm to PropJoe
quote:
LSU has done fine without him
He is 10x better today at Bama than he was at LSU. Add him leaving with a rival in state to fight recruits for, and you will see bama take a hit.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:03 pm to CrimsonFanSince94
quote:
What in the hell is wrong with you?
3 in 5 is a dynasty..
As dbt said, it's all relevant. And IMO dynasties last much longer than 5 years. Afterall, we are using the term that is based off of history itself, where dynasties last hundreds of years.
Obviously that's not the case with athletics, but surely we shouldn't throw that word around after just 5 years?
Bama, IMO, has the opportunity to become a real dynasty by winning 5-6 out of 10-12 years. There shouldn't be multiple dynasties in one's lifetime. That defeats the purpose of the word and it's history.
As I stated, the Tang dynasty lasted 290 years. I mean that's the standard that's been set from a historical standpoint. Maybe in CFB we could at least give it 10 or 20 years before we go around giving out crowns.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:04 pm to cas4t
You really know how to stir up the bammers 
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:04 pm to CrimsonFanSince94
quote:
Do you know how hard it is to be dominant in football these days? Don't think you do.
Exactly why dynasty is a word that shouldn't be thrown around. You know how tough it is to rule a country for 300 years? I don't think you do.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:07 pm to PropJoe
quote:If Bama wins, it will be 3 in 4 years (09, 10, 11, 12), with 2 back to back.
3 in 5 years
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:08 pm to PropJoe
quote:
LSU has done fine without him
LSU might have a more difficult time with next coach than UA. If a great coach is someone who wins about 80% of his games I haven't found a program that has 3 of these in a row, there's no precedent. After CLM, the odds are a slip back till someone else is found.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:08 pm to cas4t
You doing it wrong..
A dynasty such as the Ottoman Dynasty can not be compared to college football teams..
A dynasty such as the Ottoman Dynasty can not be compared to college football teams..
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:08 pm to jatebe
And that will be looked back on as a GREAT 4 year stretch.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:09 pm to cas4t
quote:
Maybe in CFB we could at least give it 10 or 20 years
Does anyone qualify? Off hand I can only think of Bryant from 61-81 with 13 CC's and 6 NC's.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:11 pm to CrimsonFanSince94
quote:
You doing it wrong..
A dynasty such as the Ottoman Dynasty can not be compared to college football teams..
No, you're doing it wrong. There is no definition of "Sports Dynsty" or "Football Dynasty". Go look it up. There's just the word dynasty. Then look up "examples of dynasties".
Yall are setting your own standards for what's considered a dynasty. I'm using the actual definition. And when you compare them it makes your argument seem very simple minded. 5 years is a very short sample pool to use for such a word as dynasty.
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:13 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
Does anyone qualify? Off hand I can only think of Bryant from 61-81 with 13 CC's and 6 NC's.
If no one qualifies then so be it. There is no "need" for dynasties. But your example is probably the closest thing to it. If you did 10 years then Miami would be close in the 80's, right?
eta: nvm, not enough NC's, but the U won their conference from 91 to 03. That's nuts. A couple of co champs thrown in, but impressive nonetheless.
I can't remember how many they won. But they were definitely dominant.
This post was edited on 12/28/12 at 1:16 pm
Posted on 12/28/12 at 1:14 pm to CrimsonFanSince94
quote:
A dynasty such as the Ottoman Dynasty can not be compared to college football teams..
Did the janissaries teabag the Armenians?
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News